Thoracoscopic Versus Endocardial Ablation in Patient With Paroxysmal AF After Failed Initial Endocardial Ablation

Thoracoscopic Ablation Versus Endocardial Ablation in Patient With Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation After Failed Initial Endocardial Ablation

Status

Completed

Phases

Phase 2

Study type

Interventional

Source

ClinicalTrials.gov

Registry ID

NCT01794416

Enrollment

Registered

2013-02-18

Start date

2011-05-31

Completion date

2013-03-31

Last updated

2013-03-26

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation

Brief summary

The investigators aimed to compare two approaches thoracoscopic epicardial ablation and endocardial catheter ablation after failed initial catheter ablation in patients with paroxysmal atrial fibrillation.

Interventions

PROCEDUREThoracoscopic epicardial ablation

PROCEDUREEndocardial catheter ablation

DEVICEImplantable loop recorder

Study design

Allocation

RANDOMIZED

Intervention model

PARALLEL

Primary purpose

TREATMENT

Masking

NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

ALL

Age

18 Years to 65 Years

Healthy volunteers

Inclusion criteria

* failed initial catheter ablation * paroxysmal atrial fibrillation

Exclusion criteria

* chronic lung disease * body mass index \>35 * longstanding atrial fibrillation 1 year * previous stroke or transient ischemic attack * left atrial thrombus * left atrial size \>65 mm * left ventricular ejection fraction \<35%

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
freedom from any atrial arrhythmia	12 months

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
rate of significant adverse events (SAEs)	12 months
atrial fibrillation burden by ILR	12 months

Countries

Russia

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026